Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014) User Reviews

What's up with Hollywood?

[vividhkothari · 6/10 · 5 December 2014]

I have never written a review in IMDb. This is my first time. Why? Because the movie hasn't been released in USA yet, and I just watched in India. Seeing just 5 reviews, I wanted to give mine too.

What's up with Hollywood? Other than spectacular visuals and 3-D, they don't seem to care enough about anything else. In Exodus, by the famed director Ridley Scott, he surpassed many elements in visual effects. I have never ever seen so detailed visuals of ancient buildings, slums of slaves, and huge ocean waves and what not. 3-D adds a lot of pleasure in viewing such effects.

That's it! There is nothing more that I could appreciate. It feels very empty. No emotions at all. Acting by Christian Bale is quite alright, but it is nothing special. Some scenes are memorable. But the lack of good writing, script, and no contribution from other actors diminish the effect of Bale as well. It is hard to imagine the same guy directed Gladiator (I haven't seen Aliens and blade runner). But there is everything missing in Exodus that made Gladiator a hit.

At many places, it is boring, even if the cinematography and visual effects are great. In the beginning, you would feel as if Ridley took you to the ancient Egyptian world, just because of the small details shown in the effects. However, any interest or so will end in next 10 minutes or so, when the story starts lacking.

So, my question remains. What's up with Hollywood? Is this much technology and huge funding to such directors destroying the creativity. Why no body cares about character building and good script? At one level, it feels extremely sad that with this budget and this talent in technology, even a slight efforts and honesty towards script, story, and dialogue can take such movies to a masterpiece level. But...no! "We are going to earn a lot of money. You are going to enjoy watching the magnificent sequence of millions of frog jumping in ancient buildings. Call it even?" Really?

Exodus: Effects and Lack of Emotion

[Quinoa1984 · 5/10 · 27 April 2015]

It's not any one thing especially that is particularly so wrong with Exodus: Gods and Kings, but an overall gloom and doom that befalls the film, the deadly serious tone, that keeps it from reaching to a higher plain of epic-filmmaking existence. Scott takes this tale SO seriously, indeed, that he has things like a stern-faced child as the voice of the "I Am". Which is fine, except that there is nary a moment of any kind of other emotion from this child actor throughout than of whining. At least when Scorsese had a child as a 'God'-like being in Last Temptation of Christ it was for a shorter period of time, and for a more specific purpose. If there was a point to be made about this child as a "God" - perhaps as his way of criticizing religion as the God of the Old Testament being a brutal eight year-old - it could have had an impact... if the rest of the film around it wasn't so thuddeningly dull.

Why is this so dull? When you have this much money at your disposal, you got to try to make as much of a HUMAN connection, to make the drama really stand out (this was something another filmmaker in 2014, Aronofsky with Noah, actually understood and really made palpable and intense amid the spectacle). Or, go the other way into broad and campy material. Scott is just there to shoot a lot of this much the way he did Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven and Robin Hood - in other words, substitute out the pyramids with colisseums, or castles, or other things, and you'd have similar hyper-kinetic action (sometimes but not always too fast) and actors who are well-trained and versed and there to do the work, but not much more.

Actually, those other films, even Robin Hood, would be preferable to sit through again than Exodus. There's just no joy or excitement to the filmmaking; the closest part where it really gets engaging and exciting and full of 'Wow' material are the plagues. Those work well, just as eye-candy. People in the cast like Christian Bale and Joel Edgerton, as Moses and Ramses respectively, are giving it their all - or as much as the script is asking them too, which is pretty similar relatively scene to scene (Ramses rarely is anything other than a "God"-type d***head). But other actors are completely wasted amid the scenery and effects: Sigourney Weaver, Aaron Paul, Ben Kingsley, they're only there to look on with awe and "huh" moments, or deliver exposition glumly. Ewen Bremmer, of all actors, as the sort of court-jester-summarizer of the plagues steals the show far as supporting players go.

It's all just flat, monotonous story-telling, and for all of those moments - that mid-section with the plagues - that are visually striking and cool-looking, there's still not much investment with the characters. We know how this will play out, but what do Scott and his screenwriters do to add anything extra aside from that been-there-done-that "lived-in" dirty quality? Uh... extra violence (albeit just up to the line of R-rated)? An opening battle? For all of the intensity of the two main actors, and the tremendous special effects, it's practically wasted on a story that is 90 minutes shorter than DeMille's 1956 Ten Commandments, feels long and sluggishly paced - this despite the fact that certain other characters who could add some human dimension (like Moses' wife) are underdeveloped and under-utilized. Just put the actor there, prop-like, shoot, go on with the next scene.

Where's a good 'Golden Calf' sequence when you really need one?

No Passover viewing treat

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 19 May 2015]

It has become somewhat fashionable to dismiss Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments because of the arcane Victorian era dialog. But I have to say that Ridley Scott's version of Exodus while technically proficient will never become the Passover viewing treat that DeMille's film has become.

Cousins Moses and Ramses are friends and rivals for the affections of the Pharoah who is Ramses dad. But when it is discovered that Moses is actually the son of Hebrew slaves that his mother Pharoah's sister drew him out of the Nile the succession of the Pharoah's line is secure.

What's not so secure is the kingdom itself as the Hebrews who came over as a family of 13 kids several centuries earlier now are in the thousands and are slaves and they ain't happy about it. In the funny way things work out in life, the adopted Egyptian prince is in fact the promised leader who is going to lead them back from whence they came which is Canaan.

In DeMille's version the dialog may be arcane, but it is also uplifting and inspiring and delivered by the ultimate DeMille leading man Charlton Heston. Yul Brynner as Ramses in that version was the arrogant Pharoah enjoying all his princely prerogatives. They made an evenly matched pair of foes and with them scrapping over Anne Baxter the conflict got personal as well as religious.

Christian Bale as Moses and Joel Edgerton as Ramses just don't give you people you can identify with.

DeMille was always good with crowds. Note how uplifting the liberation of the Hebrews is in his film. Also the small little vignettes of the various people in the crowd. They are a family/nation in his version. All they are is in Scott's version lumpen proletariat.

Whose idea was it to have the voice of God be that of a petulant child? Instead of the pyrotechnical wizardry of DeMille the Ten Commandments are given almost matter of factly by a kid to Christian Bale.

We've gone beyond Cecil B. DeMille in the art of film making. But there a things in his craft that he was the top, far and above anyone else. Not even a Ridley Scott should try.

If nothing else, you can't deny the grandeur and epic scope of this film.

[Spartan_1_1_7 · 7/10 · 8 March 2015]

Exodus is yet another big budget Hollywood movie, the other being Noah, to be based on a biblical story. This time, it is about Moses.

Christian Bale stars as Moses, who I believe was a good choice for the role and did pretty well. Can't say the same for Ramses, the evil Pharaoh. Joel Edgerton wasn't bad per say, but he didn't give this bad evil-ish vibe that I wish was present. The movie's writing is at fault here too.

The second half of the movie, starting from the plagues till the end, was great. I loved the plagues and their presentation, they were thrilling and frightening. Would have been even better if there was some breathing room given to them and if there was more suspense created, but oh well. The finale was again Epic, with the red sea rushing back and all. Being a Ridley Scott film, you can surely expect a visual spectacle, and this movie certainly had many. Beautiful views of Egypt, epic scope, great overhead shots, great cinematography all in all.

The CGI was mostly great. Egypt was beautifully realized and we get to feel its grandness. There were a few instances where green screen use was apparent. Soundtrack was decent, but I was kinda disappointed by it. Was hoping to have at least one great track that really gets you going.

Now, the movie had it fair share of flaws. The first half or so got slow pretty soon after the epic opening battle and kinda got boring. The personal stuff, aside from Moses and Ramses conflict, wasn't interesting and bogged down the movie. Also, a child messenger representing God and all the talks that followed was really underwhelming. Would have been better if it was just a voice or something, they could have used Liam Neeson's voice. But my biggest complaint with the movie is that how anti-climatic the quintessential moment was, and I'm of course talking about the splitting of the Red sea. I was in so much anticipation about finally seeing that moment realized perfectly thanks to modern CGI and with Ridley Scott at helm, only to be extremely disappointed by seeing it reduced to nothing but a steady receding of the water. WTF Ridley Scott. I get that they were going for a more realistic approach or whatever, but CMON, somethings aren't meant to be changed/meddled with.

Overall, even with the flaws, I still did like the movie. Don't hesitate to watch it because of the hate it got as majority of it is from extreme religious people or extreme atheists. Just go in with an open mind and you might enjoy it. If nothing else, you can't deny the grandeur and epicness of it.

7.8/10

technically sound but adds little to cinema

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 13 May 2015]

It's 1300 BC and 400 years of enslavement for the Jews. Moses (Christian Bale) saves Ramesses' (Joel Edgerton) life in a battle with the Hittite. Prophecy suggests that Moses would become the leader. Moses' true origin is revealed and Ramesses becomes leader after his father's death. Moses had discovered Viceroy Hegep's corruption. Hegep reveals Moses' secret to Ramesses and Moses is sent into exile. After having a family, God sends him back to Egypt to lead his people out of slavery.

There are some minor differences from 'The Ten Commandments (56)' that explains the human interactions. Ridley Scott brings the big action. There are great actors doing good work. In the end, this is simply another version of the epic with some changes. It is technically sound. The pace is uneven with some very slow sections. It doesn't add anything to the story or cinema. It can only redo some of the iconic special effects. It doesn't dive into Moses' personality. It tries to make him more human and less icon. It's not as compelling. It leaves me wondering why this movie needed to be made. This movie is made to be forgotten.

Bring on the Director's Cut

[tieman64 · 16 January 2015]

Ridley Scott directs "Exodus: Gods and Kings", a film loosely based on the Biblical book of Exodus. The plot? In 1300 BC, Egypt is ruled by Seti I (John Turturro), a ruthless warrior king. When he's not expanding his empire, ordering the construction of giant monuments or slaughtering neighbouring tribes, Seti I's enslaving Hebrews. He thinks they're filthy subhumans.

Enter Moses (Christian Bale), a skilled warrior and member of the Egyptian royal family. When it is discovered that Moses is secretly the son of Hebrew parents, Moses is banished from Egypt. Whilst in exile, Moses encounters God. God orders Moses to wage a guerrilla war on Egypt and so free the Hebrews, God's "chosen people". Moses does as told. Assisting Moses is God himself, who assaults Egypt with plagues, diseases and casual infanticide. His mission completed, Moses escorts millions of freed Hebrews to Canaan, their land of origin. Egypt's non-Hebrew slaves apparently don't matter.

This is roughly where Scott's film ends. Were he to continue recounting this Biblical tale, "Exodus" would end on a much more macabre note: after forty years of wondering, the Hebrews slaughter the Canaanites and establish the Kingdom of Israel. Because these Israelites worship false idols, however, an angry God scatters them from "one end of the earth to the next", where they shall "remain in exile until forgiven". The notion that God has "banished" Jews from Israel is typically why many rabbis vehemently oppose Zionist movements; for many, a Jewish homeland is antithetical to the wishes of God.

The second book of both the Torah and the Tanakh, Exodus remains central to the identity of Jews and Israelis. From Exodus was the Jewish festival of Passover derived, as well as the Haggadah, a holy text. The Zionist movement - as well as Israel's long-standing practise of "denying the existence" of those it colonises - likewise has its roots in Exodus. Today, archaeologists, historians and Biblical scholars generally treat the contents of Exodus as being pure fiction. There was no homogeneous group of "Hebrews" during this period, there is no evidence of Egyptians enslaving "Israelites", there was no "exodus", no "plagues", no "forty years of wandering", and millions of "Hebrews" were not "cast out of Egypt". Throw in the fact that Scott's made a film set in North Africa which is devoid of brown and black faces, and you have a picture which would give most historians a stroke.

Ignoring its historical inanities, "Exodus" is schizophrenic for more fundamental reasons. Ridley Scott is an atheist, and is attempting to direct a religious epic which simultaneously appeals to secular audiences, as well as conservatives from the three main Abrahamic religions.

And so "Exodus" opens with characters discussing matters of "interpretation". Should certain earthly events be interpreted as coincidence or the will of God? Are events in the film supernatural or natural? Scott, of course, tries to have it both ways. Whilst his film's miracles can be explained away using scientific reasoning (madness, head concussions, lightning strikes, tsunami generating meteors etc), Scott makes sure to throw in little moments which contradict such readings. For religious film-goers, the film's God is undoubtedly "real".

But Scott doesn't let believers off easy. In his hands, God speaks to Moses via Malak, a messenger who takes the form of a petulant child. Scott's point is clear: God is an infantile jerk. "Is this the god you want us to worship?!" the Egyptians yell, when God has slaughtered all their children. "Is your god a child killer?!"

But whilst Scott denounces such murderous Gods, he also does the opposite. "When anger evolves, when a group is not being paid attention to, they resort to terror," Scott says in interviews. A similar line is contained in his film: "You have to kill the innocent," God tells Moses, "in order to warn their leaders and force them to liberate your people."

In the contemporary world, these divine words echo the statements of "terrorists" and "democratic governments", both of whom claim to be "justifiably killing civilians" in the name of "liberation". Scott's Moses is himself essentially a religious fundamentalist, a terrorist waging a guerrilla war on an Empire based solely on his personal visions and private beliefs. Figures like him are common in history. In the 1830s, for example, a black slave called Nat Turner believed he was receiving messages from God. Believing that he was "ordained for a higher purpose" and was "destined to free the slaves", Nat led a slave rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia. History is littered with countless similar examples. Oppressed people typically have nothing to turn to but their private Gods, who "give" them courage to resist. Usually these resistance movements fail, at which point the oppressed are further demonized.

In an era of rampant Islamophobia, and of superficial, wholly ahistorical hysteria about "terrorism", you'd think all these themes would lend "Exodus" all kinds of contemporary, political overtones. But no. The ridiculous "whiteness" of the film's westernised heroes, and the fact that the film's Egyptians literally are an evil, slave-reliant Empire, dilutes these possibilities. Scott's film is ultimately about god-fearing Judeo-Christian "good guys" who take on evil brown guys in the name of God and Freedom. When "we" do it it's righteous judgement. When the Other does it, it's barbarism.

Though silly in places, "Exodus" is exciting, brisk and oft spectacular. Working in the vein of Cecil DeMille, one marvels at how effortlessly Scott churns out massive historical epics. His film contains several gorgeous (if implausible) landscape shots of ancient Egypt, which seem inspired by 19th century Orientalist painters (Jean-Leon Gerome, Gustav Bauernfeind, David Roberts etc). Co-starring a miscast Joel Edgerton and the always ridiculous Ben Kingsley.

7.9/10 - See "Walker", "Burn!" and Scott's own "Kingdom of Heaven".

An enthralling accomplishment in mythological, fictional or historical storytelling

[newmailbrendan · 6/10 · 8 February 2015]

Another beautifully achievement in movie making for Ridley Scott to add to his magnificent filmography.

'Exodus: Gods and Kings' is totally uncomplicated and very resourceful for those who didn't knew much about the story of Moses.

The special effects was also a stunningly incredible experience, especially in 3D.

However the first half of the movie is wordy and a bit low on action, but also writing. I find the second half of the story absolutely pretty well told and it really paid off our time we have spent on this long journey. Our much given time felt worthy and most important satisfying.

Because after two hours of watching, coming to experience the ending was so sentimental and extraordinary well done. I think you just can not get no goose bumps. It was mind blowing. It was a masterpiece to watch.

Really good

[dan-howard-photo · 7/10 · 23 April 2022]

Good movie. Bale is awesome as ever. I liked the presentation of "God"

I really wished the film covered more of Moses after they left Egypt. There's a lot of interesting stuff in the Bible after the Exodus all the way to the walls of Jericho incident. Maybe a sequel would be good!

Darling! Moses is on the phone....

[ggallegosgroupuk · 2/10 · 21 April 2017]

What, in God's name, was this? Everything reeks of commercial operation without any real thought behind it. Of all the puzzling elements in this bizarre epic, the most inexplicable is Christian Bale as Moses. Not the choice of Christian Bale - commercial operation, remember - no, that I understand, what's inexplicable is his performance. We know now Christian Bale is a great actor. Great. The Fighter alone puts him right up there with some of the best of his generation so why then he's so bad, but so bad here. His Moses is absent. Not a moment of truth, not a moment of real connection. Was he a hostage, performing against his will? That's what I felt, that he didn't want to be there and that alone made me watch the whole film with disdain. What a disheartening experience. I give it a 2 and not a 1 out of respect for the crew, because their work is real and present on the screen.

Your Senses Will Feast, Your Brain Will Starve

[damianphelps · 7/10 · 5 February 2023]

Exodus is a truly beautiful visual and audio masterpiece. The effects, the cinematography is as good as you will see and the audio is bombastic and stirring.

Unfortunately the story doesn't offer much more. The are no Lawrence of Arabia 'no prisoners' moments, nothing to prick the hairs on your neck. And for the non religious the story is daft.

What it does do is make God, via The Voice of God, look like a bit of a vengeful tosser. He/she doesn't really look good in this film. God is asked the question by Moses, why did you let them suffer for 400 years and The VOG basically says 'well what have you done'. Then God goes on a killing spree murdering innocent children. Awesome go God go.

Another negative aspect is the casting, especially the casting of Ewen Bremner (a great actor) but not many Egyptians have a Scottish accent!!!

Religious nuttery aside, the movie is entertaining and although longish will amuse most :)

Terrible Schlock

[Segarr · 3/10 · 9 December 2014]

I went into this film with an open mind. I have enjoyed Ridley Scott movies in the past, particularly Gladiator which is the same genre of film as this. Unfortunately, I was left feeling extremely disappointed. Although this is a classic, biblical story that most movie-goers are likely already familiar with, the film-makers have decided to pad this ancient tale with over-the-top action scenes, as well as one-note characters that feel more like cardboard cut-outs as opposed to actual human beings. The most shameful aspect of the film is the part that I was most looking forward to : The Actual Plague. While I was hoping to see harrowing images of Egypt being decimated in a genuinely frightening tale, we are instead bombarded with fake looking CGI that simply left me dry. The plague feels more like a computer montage than an actual scary event.Terrible script. Weak performances. An over-reliance on CGI instead of CHARACTERS and STORY! Overall, just a bad film. Didn't help that they chose big named actors instead of people that looked more like Ancient Egyptians. Pass.

A better movie for vfx geek like me!

[Reno-Rangan · 8/10 · 3 April 2015]

This is a well known story and I have also seen the '56 movie 'The Ten Commandments'. So in this film could not foresee the modification, but it did in a slight manner like the later 'Noah' movie. The best part was the visuals, the graphics were so good, hard to resist the pleasure if you are vfx geek like me. That's the reason I love modern movie, especially remake of a classic like 'King Kong'. The problem in this flick was lie in the story telling.

As we know, Ridley Scott is an excellent narrator, but this movie was too short even though it ran 150 minutes. I felt it was just a brief, I mean there were no details or depth in the important scenes. You will know what I'm saying if you had watched '56 movie I mentioned in a above paragraph. That's drawback for the first timers at a same time advantage for not to fall in boredom for those who have already seen other versions. Christian Bale, awesome; Joel Edgerton, good; Ben Kingsley, never required; Aaron Paul, totally waste.

Overall, not cleverly stablised in the scenes that are very important, especially the final one about ten commandments should have been extended a little bit with a moral message. If it was a Peter Jackson movie, definitely it would have been a trilogy with an aggregated time of over 500 minutes. This movie was an entertainer like I enjoyed it than the message deliverer. Must be watched for the amusement and for the pleasure in updating technical aspect of the narration rather than inspiration.

7.5/10

Typical Ridley: great visuals, sod all else

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 9 January 2015]

Back in ancient Egypt, BatMoses has a friendly quasi-sibling thing going on with baldie Ramses. Baldie Ramses' dad Seti, named after the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, rates BatMoses higher than baldie Ramses but, when Seti dies, baldie Ramses takes over as Pharaoh and turns out to be a bit of a petulant bully. BatMoses turns out to be a Hebrew, and takes it upon himself to get baldie Ramses to release 400,000 Hebrew slaves so that they can wander home to Canaan, to the annoyance of his (BatMoses) Spanish wife. This proposal doesn't go down well with baldie Ramses as he has an extensive redevelopment programme going on in downtown Memphis (Egypt, not Tennessee), which does not include street lighting despite the Egyptian desert being curiously dark. BatMoses gets helpful hints on how to proceed from God, who only he can see (God has decided that he will achieve maximum credibility if he takes the form of a peevish 11 year-old lad with a speech impediment). Baldie Ramses eventually lets the Hebrews go after a bit of murder on God's part, which is only fair given that there was a bit of murder on baldie Ramses' part too, and BatMoses leads the Hebrews on a gentle stroll beside the seaside which turns out to be rather more dramatic than anyone expected. Eventually, after many visits to the Straggly Hebrew Beard And Wig Shoppe, BatMoses leads the Hebrews to a bit of desert which looks the same as every other bit of desert, still with no street lighting.

There are no huge surprises here. Neither Moses nor Ramses comes across as at all sympathetic: only Seti (a surprisingly well cast John Turturro) is likable. God is truly annoying. The plagues are done well: in fact, the visuals are well done apart from everything being so dark. Perhaps it was the 3D specs, perhaps the projector needed a new bulb, but even the scenes in full desert sunlight looked dim. Christian Bale's BatMoses has an odd accent, which wavers between English and a variation of his BatRoar. These people are pros, so they aren't bad, but there is nothing here which screams "Oscar".

Ridley Scott reliably gets great visuals on screen, and disappoints with a lack of substance behind them. I was hoping this would be better.

Exodus retold, an Epic's epic failure

[sagarika-ravulapati · 1/10 · 11 December 2014]

First, I have a question about the title itself, the movie clearly claims to be based out of the bible. So, who are the Gods here, isn't it one God who brought His people out of Egypt which the movie boasts about also? Has the director taken the words of Pharaoh too seriously when he says I am God?

Let alone the title,as I walked into the theater late, I only saw Christian Bale saving some kingly dressed Egyptian. And the next thing I see the Egyptian man calls him Moses. Where is this coming from? Sure, Moses lived in the palace raised by the Pharaoh's daughter but when did he save Pharaoh's son in the war? Moses, the author of Exodus himself would have remembered to give himself that credit if he did that, wouldn't he?

Well, the director tries to make a point about the 'valiant' Moses, But later you find it is little too much exaggeration of thought to give screen time of around 20 minutes to the whole act of Moses discovering about his nationality, when Bible just conveys that he already knew he is a Hebrew.Absolutely ridiculous thing is to use Ben Kingsley as Nun, who is the father of Joshua for the dramatic effect of letting the cat out of the bag that Moses is a Hebrew. All this successfully blurs the actual details of the character of Moses through the way he was raised. Truth about his nationality and race helped him choose the side and kill the Egyptian in the first instance he saw his people troubled. That is what truth does; it will aid you in judgment.

The most disappointing scene in the movie has not yet come until you see a bush burning and a small boy saying that he is the I AM. I was looking forward to this entire dialog between God and Moses but apparently this Moses was sinking in mud hit by stones and he wakes up getting convinced by his wife that it is all in his head. Yeah, as this Moses doesn't go with a staff on to this mountain like the one guarding the sheep, also misses God's instruction to use staff to work wonders to convince his people.

I know, now we just wait for him to get back to Egypt and set things in action, meet Aaron and negotiate with Pharaoh regarding the release of his people. But you will be shocked that this Moses is neither the one who stammers with tongue nor with his sword. He secretly ambushes Pharaoh in his palace and threatens him in the name of God.For whatever reasons, Moses here trains an army of handful of Israelite men the basics of archery, for what? to take down the entire Egyptian army? I doubt that! To deal with this adamant Moses, God says I will do my business, you can stop fighting, only to dampen the Moses's mighty spirit to save his own people.

I can't believe they showed the plagues to have had fueled from the river full of crazy crocodiles eating 10 men!! Whatever the director thought of the original story of Aaron using his staff on the river to change it into blood, he came up with this idiotic picture in his head. And all the other plagues are the effect of this blood plague! Clearly there was no effort made while narrating this story to convey that Hebrew people are not being affected by the plagues. On top of it, Moses is telling God to fall in line with the story by saying that everyone is getting affected by these bloody plagues can you like stop?

Thanks to the disobedient Moses, it helped the director not convey God's repeated messages to Pharaoh, warning him to leave Israelites from his country. Good God! Somehow, Moses cryptically warns Pharaoh that his son might die that night if he wouldn't let his people out of country by night. I couldn't stop wondering if it not for the actual Pharaoh, this Pharaoh would have listened if Moses just spoke the words as absolute God's word.

By now, we should know what to expect from this Moses, but I was totally unmoved by his concern for lambs over the preparation for Passover. We see that the movie might end soon when Hebrew people start to leave Egypt with anticipation about the great Red sea scene. Another disappointment greets us there as well, no amount of joy is shown on the faces of people who have been slaves for 400 years once they got freedom, I am sure the director very well knows how America celebrates 4th of July!

I think I need to let go of some more failures of Moses here and just come to the end, yeah there is no parting of the red sea! You will be aghast to discover the reason for water to recede, Moses flinging his sword into the water! Moses has absolutely no clue where he is going, no God to talk to him. Pharaoh hasn't lost the lead, follows him soon. Given the confused emotions of Moses about his love for his Pharaoh Brother putting him in turmoil, fighting his own personal battles he waits and waits to be drowned in the flood. Oh no, they didn't kill him and our hero comes out of the sea to the side where Hebrews are waiting. Now, who led who exactly! Sigh!!

The onward journey began, and there comes the Mt Sinai, God called Moses to write 10 commandments, the futility of the movie became crystal clear as God serves him tea and asks him to write a commandment if he agrees on the validity of that particular command.

In conclusion, it's a story told but the truth left untold!

The Biblical epic updated for your pleasure

[bob-larrance · 7/10 · 5 March 2015]

A movie need not be a mirror that you gaze into to somehow discover your own soul, the human condition or much of anything at all. It is quite alright to watch a movie for a little harmless entertainment. Ah, but there are those of our species that wish each event could be crafted to teach a lesson, or right a wrong or bend the mind of the uneducated to a certain point of view. They are happiest when they exert a little control over you, citizen! Those people just bore me to tears.

I found this to be an enjoyable 'Biblical Epic' type of film with above average acting, cinematography and direction. I believe that if a person has two hours to spend and wants a little diversion this will do. It is a work that represents the 'spectacular' genre these days and is well worth the time and rental fee.

On the other hand, if a person wants historical accuracy they should probable seek out a documentary and cross their fingers – the era handled by Scott isn't all that well known and there is much disagreement about the Jewish migration out of Egypt. At the time, nobody was taking pictures or tweeting about the experience. As a result, almost all we know about that time is either speculation or mythology or both. (Those that argue about the 'accuracy of this movie really tickle me.) Of course, this movie deals with religious topics. You already knew that I bet. If you are going to watch Exodus for religious reasons look out! If you are really devout, you will find it weak. If you are without religion, you will find it too strong. If you practice the faith of Rameses you will no doubt be offended. Happy entrails to you.

Ff you like to get your religion from someplace other than from a Ridley Scott movie you will be OK on the faith issue. I was neither converted nor offended.

And, if you are looking for cinema that will either reaffirm your political beliefs or teach you something really, really deep then bypass this. It is a movie, not some sort of brain add-on that will make you a better person or symbolically pat you on the back for being so accurate, either left or right, in your politics.

Chris Bale is good as Moses. I know, easy for me to say (I never met Moses) but I think he is good. Bale's character develops and grows as the story goes on and though he's a little young I can buy him as the patriarch. Joel Edgerton is a good Rameses. No, he isn't Egyptian by birth. But, he is all the Rameses I looked forward to and he's appropriately cruddy when the need arises. Pharaohs are a spoiled bunch and Joel conveys that quality well. Maria Valverde is effective in her role as Mrs. Moses. She is a model, by the way, and a woman that is skilled at appearing glamorous. Ben Kingsley gets to play the Ben Kingsley part. I really have no problems with his casting and he does his version of Ben Kingsley quite well.

Several of the named talents have very small, insignificant roles. That is too bad for them, I am sure. But there screen time doesn't harm the movie.

The more spectacular elements of the story are done well. Plagues, parting waters, theological discussions with you-know-who, all pulled off skillfully. Sex is quite muted (less than pre-Hayes stuff)and the gore isn't all that gory (for the most part) so I think it is OK for the kiddies. This isn't history a la Pasolini.

Way back then things were probably quite rotten for many of the residents. This movie shows the conditions without bleeding all over the screen. I think that is a plus. But the sense of struggle for an oppressed minority is effectively conveyed.

In short a rather good movie! If you wish, you can believe those that would rather (ahem) make your thoughts their concern to the point that they direct your behavior. Or, you can trust good old me, I promise that for a modern day Old Testament epic this one is dandy.

Impressive Biblical epic , co-produced by USA/Spain/England and spectacularly shot in Spanish outdoors

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 11 January 2016]

Exciting rendition about the Biblic leader who led Jews out of Egypt against the Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses , setting 600,000 slaves on a monumental journey of escape . Spectacular as well as long running story produced/directed by Ridley Scott with all-star-cast . Biblical and evocative tale that deals with Moses , the Hebrew lawgiver . Evocative adaptation about known story , it recounts the greatest Bible story ever told , a journey through the Holy Land that focuses Moses (Christian Bale) , the Hebrew leader , leading the Jews out of Egypt and realized in Hollywood style . This is the wonderful story about an extraordinary man receiving a holy calling , and follows his life from his stand in pharaoh Seti (John Turturro) court , slavery and trials in leading the Jews ; this is one of the greatest events in epic motion picture history . Biblical story developed in on a great scale though no such as the classic Cecil B. De Mille's version . An Egyptian prince named Moses who is adopted and brought up in the court by an Egyptian princess and learns of his identity as a Hebrew and later his destiny to become the chosen deliverer of his people . This vivid storytelling although fairly standard follows appropriately the Moses'life , the son of a Jew slave , from birth and abandonment on a basket over river Nile , as when the Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn babies , being pick up by Egyptian princesses and he's raised in the royal court , becoming into Prince of Egypt . As Moses embarks a supernatural mission , as the Egyptian Prince , learns of his true heritage as a Hebrew and his divine mission as the deliverer of his people , getting the freedom for Hebrews . When his Hebrew origin is revealed , Moses is cast out of Egypt , and makes his way across the desert . Then , Moses retires out of Egypt where meets Jethro , marring him with his daughter Zipporah (Maria Valverde) . The stoic Moses along with his brother Aaron (Andrew Tarbet) and Joshue (Aaron Paul) confront Pharaoh Ramses (Joel Edgerton , though Oscar Isaac and Javier Bardem reportedly turned down the role) . Moses asks Pharaoh to liberate them but he refuses, causing the Egyptian plagues : invasion of locusts , fogs , epidemic , water become in blood and death of the first-born . At night , the angel of death comes , and passes over the protected doors of the Jews . As the death angel kills off the first born children of Egypt, including Pharaoh' son . Moses takes charge of God's people and wrests them from Pharaoh's punishing grip . Moses like liberator of the Jewish leads his people throughout desert battling enemies and with holy intervention .

This is a monumental version of the Biblic book of ¨Exodus¨ with great production design by Arthur Max ; being carried out in utter conviction and breathtaking special effects by means of groundbreaking C.G.I. , including the parting of the Red Sea . The production team formed by Sebastián Álvarez , Denise O'Dell , Teresa Kelly , Soliman , and Michael Schaefer conferred with roughly experts to make the film as spectacular as possible and including ample participation by various screenwriters as Bill Collage , Jeffrey Caine and Steven Zaillian who worked together Scott in Hannibal (2001 and American Gangster (2007) . Obviously changes were made to the story to make it work as a Biblical feature , in fact , there is a short list of differences between the movie and the Biblic account of the Exodus . Serious acting by Christian Bale who plays a sober Moses . Secondary cast is frankly good , such as : John Turturro as Seti , Aaron Paul as Joshua , Tara Fitzgerald as Miriam , Ben Mendelsohn , Ben Kingsley , Sigourney Weaver , Massoud as Grand Vizier, Indira Varma as High Priestess , Ewen Bremner , among others . Glamorous and luxurious costume design by Janty Yates . Colorful cinematography by Dariusz Wolski filmed on location in Spain : Canary Islands , Fuerteventura , Almeria and Morocco . Special mention for sensitive and thrilling musical score by maestro Oscarized Alberto Iglesias . This movie was one of the most expensive epics ever made at the time , 2014 . In fact , it is one of two big budget films based on the Old Testament to come out in this year , the other one being Noé . However , watching in TV it makes lost most really overblown scenarios on the small screen . This Hollywood blockbuster , filmed in 74 days , was professionally directed by Ridley Scott ; being suitable for family viewing and religious people , though it was was banned in Morocco and Egypt . And dedicated to Tony Scott, Ridley Scott's brother who took his own life in 2012

Other adaptations told in compactly form are the followings : classic mute (1923) by Cecil B. DeMille with Theodore Roberts , Rochefort ; the second handling and the greatest , made in a gargantuan scale by Cecil B. DeMille (1956) played by Charlton Heston , Yul Brynner, Anne Baxter , Debra Paget , John Derek , Edward G. Robinson and Vincent Price . Furthermore , a TV recounting by Gianfranco De Bossio with Burt Lancaster , Anthony Quayle , Mariangela Melato , Ingrid Thulin ; and a new take on titled ¨In the beginning¨ (2000) by Kevin Connor with Billy Campbell as Moses , Christopher Lee as Seti and Art Malik as Rameses ; animated rendition (1998) titled ¨Prince of Egypt¨ produced by Dreamworks and directed by Simon Welles . And a television rendition (2006) by Robert Dornhelm with Dougray Scott , Susan Lynch , Naveen Andrews , Paul Rhys , Linus Roache , among others

Exodus: Gods and Kings

[abouhelier-r · 7/10 · 26 December 2014]

The defiant leader Moses rises up against the Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses, setting 600,000 slaves on a monumental journey of escape from Egypt and its terrifying cycle of deadly plagues.

Exodus: Gods and kings is directed by Ridley Scott, stars Christian Bale as Moses and Joel Edgerton as Ramses. There are a lot of controversy around this movie. I really do love Ridley Scott. I have a huge respect for his work as he made some of the best sci-fie movies of all time and he continues to make a tone of films. First of all the opening battle sequence is spectacular and beautifully filmed. Everything from the ten plagues to the end of the Red Sea sequence is absolutely fantastic as well; though somethings in between are a bit hard to get through. Secondly, Joel Edgerton's character is good and he is a great actor, but not for that part; John Turturro stands out as an actor, he's almost comical. It's great to see Sigourney Weaver back in a Ridley Scott film even if she has like two lines so there's not much to be excited about. Plus, Ben Kingsley and Chistian Bale deliver really good performances. In fact Christian Bale ads a lot of emotion to Moses' character, as you can perfectly understand his family position and his life once he discovers about his youth. Moses is depicted differently than before as he really is human in this film and not this faithful unbreakable rock. However, it missed something about the brotherhood relationship between Moses and Ramses as they never really get to face each other till the end of the movie, we don't get to see their evolution. Finally, the last scene of the Red Sea is so well done, Ridley Scott genuinely knows epic and clearly understands how to show an awesome battle scene. The scope of this film is huge displaying a modern tale of Moses story in which Egypt never looked so big and grand; just like it should have been at that time.

Overall the entire film looks beautiful with great performances from leading actors, I loved the epic scope but it may be a bit too long.

Another interpretation of the Bible

[mm-39 · 7/10 · 21 December 2014]

Another interpretation of the Bible. Moses was portrayed as a man who had doubts, and struggled with God's will. The details of loyalty towards old ties and Moses' destiny were unravelled in Exodus story. Details of Egyptian life, and interpretation of miracles and events were portrayed in a manner where belief and doubt were sub stories in Exodus. How one sees God is challenged in the movie. Scott executed a film which creates a feel for the people, politics and the living conditions for the times. Bale, Edgerton, etc portrayed strong characters. Exodus will challenge peoples interpretation of the Old testament. As a man of faith, I found Exodus reflects, and challenges one 's beliefs, which is a normal struggle in one's life. Seven out of ten.

Bland, lazy and arrogant

[charitable-184-236254 · 1/10 · 12 December 2014]

We all know Scott can bring a vision to the screen with ease, create a sweeping vista and bring a dream to life. In part he does that here; a version of ancient Egypt is brought to life, superficially it seems right, until you realise this is all this movie has going for it.

Its empty, like a chocolate cake with sawdust inside. I feel cheated, extremely disappointed, and unenlightened.

Apart from the incredibly distracting casting choices, we know ancient Egyptians were brown to dark brown, the costumes and setting just didn't ring true and continuously brought me out of the movie and into the increasingly monotonous script that lacked any originality, spark or wit.

Yes, this is straight by the numbers; even including a more 'scientific' approach to the story that I think was supposed to be clever or original, but just fell flat and drained even more life from the movie.

Performances I felt were very ordinary; Bale played his usual character role, serious faced throughout, as did Edgerton, although yet again and again I found distracting his manicured eyebrows and shaven head, clearly a poor attempt to look 'other', when his role should have clearly gone to another. The so called must have big names Scott whined of, such as Weaver, had hardly a word to say.

Its also overlong, or seems it. Large segments between set pieces drag on and on, you check your watch and instead of 30 minutes gone, you realise only 4 minutes have. This is nothing like gladiator. Scott has gotten old. Hes not going to get better.

Only watch if you like a biblical epic with no originality and dour presentation. Everyone else, save your cash and if you are tempted, don't bother with 3D.

Well.. I enjoyed it.

[kbw429 · 23 December 2014]

I heard many negative reviews, from both non-Christian and Christian critiques and audience. However, my parents and I were surprised by the movie, because we didn't think that we would enjoy this film so much. The middle part might seem slow-paced and boring to some (or many) viewers. However, the movie, as the story progresses, gets gradually better. When the movie reached toward the climax and finally hit it, we were all moved and satisfied by the movie. My family liked the movie, and maybe we have a horrible taste (I'm sorry). However, we didn't really care because we enjoyed it. I hope you, in spite of various negative reviews, give it a try - at least to meet Christian Bale as Moses or see your "Prince of Egypt" come alive as a film.

Believe what you want, but don't criticize this movie based on it!!

[bacho-ramishvili · 7/10 · 10 March 2015]

First of all, those negative reviews are coming from people who judge this movie based on historical "facts" that nobody can prove and their religion or believes. But movie itself is really entertaining and that's what matters not some fictional or maybe close to truth story that for some reason offends this really well educated people, who know exactly what happened to Moses and hebrews.

I really liked this movie, well there's lot of CGI but not out of place.Acting is good, could've been better but definitely not bad.. Story telling is decent..

Portrayal of god is not clichéd and that was really great, for some people if god's in the movie, it should talk from clouds or something with deep voice..well it was not great choice but acceptable..

Pharaoh was IMO best thing of this movie, he was well developed, with mixed feelings and questioning decisions, not like some menacing or diabolic guy who kills just because he's evil. No everything is in place for this character.

Overall movie is watchable, entertaining, interesting.. Ridley Scott wanted to tell the story of Moses in he's way and he did.

P.S. egyptians were white and if i'm wrong, so could you..

Even at 3 hours 40 minutes, time flies by watching The 1956 Ten Commandments movie, and absolutely C r a w l s by watching this one...

[jeffn7 · 1/10 · 13 December 2014]

I could Not have been more disappointed in "Exodus Gods and Kings." It's impossible for me to not compare it with "The Ten Commandments" since it's exactly the same story, so here goes...

"The Ten Commandments" movie of 1956 at 3 hours and 40 minutes, with No CGI, and No battle scenes is easily 10 times more enjoyable than "Exodus Gods and Kings."

Every moment of "The Ten Commandments" is so captivating with top quality story, scripts, acting, directing, sets, costumes, visual effects, and music that time really flies by when watching it. "Exodus Gods and Kings," however, is so desperately dull, with horrible script, cheap looking sets, lack luster performances, I can honestly say that it's the worst movie I have seen in a very long time.

Even the music was forgettable (except when it sounded like the original "Stargate" movie soundtrack, which it did a lot of times).

And don't even get me started on the visual effects in "Exodus Gods and Kings." The plagues are done so well they're stomach churning, but they don't even happen in the way that the original Bible stories say they happened. But the ONE scene in the entire movie that's really spectacular CGI is directed so completely without thought that it makes no sense whatsoever...

SMALL SPOILER ALERT: The water in the Red Sea is rapidly receding to the right, sort of like what happens before a Tsunami. It only takes a few minutes for that area of the Red Sea to be shallow enough for the thousands of recently freed Hebrews to start walking across. This is disappointing as far as visuals go, but does make sense so far. Then just before the giant wave comes we see absolutely spectacular storm clouds and multiple tornadoes and waterspouts develop. These visual effects are some of the best ever in the history of CGI, but the tornadoes didn't actually do anything at all in this scene. They did not pull the water away in the first place, like the storm clouds created by God (or spaceships) did in "The Ten Commandments." They simply appeared in the distance for no reason, just before the huge Tsunami wave crashed down on Pharaoh's soldiers.

To show the outright sloppiness of this movie again, in scene after scene there are one or two guys spying on Moses, and nothing ever happens as a result. It's a big set up to a big nothing.

LAST BUT NOT LEAST: If you happen to be a fan of the "Ancient Aliens" show or believe in Hebrew Mysticism you will be sorely disappointed in "Exodus Gods and Kings." Mostly because, the only reason Moses sees a burning bush or talks to God the first time is that he just got conked on the head by a huge rock. Then, every time a miracle happens, this sassy little boy (who is just now angry at the Egyptian Pharaohs after 400 years of Hebrew enslavement) is the one doing the miracles, not even through Moses. Moses really does none of the miracles in this movie. He has a sword through most of it, and never even carries a staff.

In the Bible, when Moses came down from Mt. Sinai his face was shining. This is important no matter what your beliefs are. They at least touch on this in "The Ten Commandments" but in "Exodus Gods and Kings," the only thing that happens on Mt. Sinai is that the little boy dictates the ten commandments to Moses as he carves them onto the rock tablets. And they don't even show him actually saying any of them. He's just sitting there watching Moses work.

Finally, I have to say that it would have been very nice to actually see the Ark of the Covenant in a movie about Moses. Moses is shown riding with presumably the Ark in a basket on a veiled wagon, but still the only time in the history of the movies that we get to see the actual Ark is in an Indiana Jones movie, which is also easily 10 times better than "Exodus Gods and Kings."

So if you feel like seeing a Biblical movie or a movie about ancient Egypt, definitely buy or rent "The Ten Commandments" (1956). Also, "The Robe" (1953) is not a Bible story, but is the best portrayal of true Christian principles of faith and unconditional love that I have ever seen. Both have amazing, high quality stereo and surround sound for their time. Their original soundtrack albums are two of the all time best in the history of Hollywood also.

In fact, as inaccurate as it may be, I even found the 2008 adventure "10,000 BC" hugely more enjoyable than "Exodus Gods and Kings." Likewise the 1994 sci-fi film "Stargate."

Pleasantly surprised

[aheaven2005 · 8/10 · 6 February 2021]

Maybe because my expectations were lowered by all the bad reviews I actually liked this one. Taken for a simple but efficient action movie it actually works. But most of all it's the photography and visual quality that I really appreciated. And of course Christian Bale offers a solid performance while being on screen for almost all of the scenes.

Beautiful but Dramatically Flawed Epic

[JohnWelles · 7/10 · 25 February 2015]

"Exodus: Gods and Kings" (2014), directed by Ridley Scott is a return to the oft-told Biblical story, most famously filmed by Cecil B. DeMille in "The Ten Commandments" (1956), of Moses liberating the Israelites. However, Scott, currently cinema's foremost director of historical epics with "Gladiator" (2000), "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005) and "Robin Hood" (2010), attempts to bring a fresh approach to a sporadically revived genre that has lain largely dormant for decades.

"Exodus" though, only partially succeeds. Despite running for two and a half hours, the film still feels abbreviated and characters unnecessarily abandoned (Scott has claimed his preferred cut would another ninety minutes). Many of the fine supporting cast, including Aaron Paul, Ben Kingsley and Sigourney Weaver, have little development and merely deliver exposition of the picture's plot, serving more as ciphers than real characters. Even the adventurous decision of having God portrayed as a petulant child by Issac Andrews backfires, lacking the requisite gravitas. The film is left feeling oddly diminutive despite the massed thousands of slaves or Egyptian soldiers, brought to life by some uneven computer generated imagery. Worse still, the script (by Steven Zaillian amongst others) seems to evade Moses himself; Bale is convincing but he's asked to create nuances that just aren't there. Joel Edgerton, as Ramesses, and John Turturro, playing Seti, fare better, embodying the complex court politics of the pharaohs' rule.

However, all is not lost. If the cast are left to fend for themselves by the script, then at least we can regale in Scott's beautiful craft. Early scenes, of Ramesses extracting venom from snakes or Mosses visiting a slave encampment run by Ben Mendelsohn, show his grasp of the power of images, the positioning of the camera, the instinctive knowledge of when to cut, revealing Scott's visual complexity. Cinematographer Dariusz Wolski uses digital photography to convey the harshness of the desert light, the unblinking intensity of the North African sun (the film was shot on location in Morocco as well as in Almería, Spain), that admirably shows the dirt and grit of the ancient world. Scott's movies always look extraordinary and this is no exception: the film's stand-out sequence is the ten plagues overwhelming the Egyptian capital of Memphis, the Nile turning red and the waves of all-consuming locusts and flies, a visual coup that belongs to a better thought-out film.

"Exodus: Gods and Kings" is undoubtedly a flawed film, belonging to the lower tier's of Scott's filmography, and yet in its pictorial richness, it becomes strangely fascinating despite the neglect of a host fine thespians and the erratic quality of its special effects. An intriguing misfire then, that becomes more interesting than more tonally consistent studio pictures. Maybe the Director's Cut will be worth waiting for.

Ridley. You are no Mel Gibson!

[salieri_21 · 3/10 · 8 December 2014]

What a waste of my time and money this movie was. Just feels wrong from start to finish. A fake epic devoid of any real emotions and soul.

Wish Mr. Scott has the courage someone like Mel Gibson had when he made this movie. Passion Of The Christ & Apocalypto are prime examples of a director willing to risk everything for what he believes in(even if you disagree with it). And after watching this film. I can safely say Ridley only believes in money.

Moses & Ramesses should've been played by middle eastern actors. Christian Bale should've played Moses' brother Aaron(according to old scriptures, he did most of the talking for Moses). While John Turturro & Sigourney Weaver casting was just plain wrong!

The story has been told so many times and it would've been much better if Ridley told the story of the Hebrews after leaving Egypt. Their 40- year Sinai plight for example. Started the film with the plagues & the Red Sea parting, then took off from there to show us events not many know of.

Don't waste your money on this. Wait for the director's cut then rent it. Maybe Mr. Scott can save this from the $4.99 shelf.